This is great. Though I've always been interested in natural history, I've developed an interest in the origin of life only since the theories involving serpentinizing systems have come to my attention. The RNA world ideas seem too incomplete to be interesting except in theory. I'm guessing that nucleic acid polymerization happened after a good deal of metabolic development that then fostered it and protected it from hydrolysis. Selection must have started before genetics. Thanks Martina.
Pardon me for the delay of commenting, just got this on my RU-vid feed. The thing that gets me is the 23 degree axial tilt of Earth. That is such an ideal for balancing seasonal temperatures on a rotating planet(22 1/2 degrees being perfect). A planet with, say, a 10 degree tilt, will have fairly moderate and mildly changing temperatures in its' temperate zone, but will continue to be much colder near and at its' poles. A 40 degree tilted planet should have much more extreme seasons, especially at the poles.
I love this concept. Can we actually do it though? If we manage to send a mission at 20 AU a year and we need to get to 600, simple math tells us 30 years…. We are talking about sending something into space farther than any spacecraft we have ever (to this day) accomplished as far as distance is concerned. It would require a generational effort…. Spectroscopy alone would won’t get it done…. Would we be able to see the night sky (and perhaps artificial light sources)?
Isn't there a LISA type array in existing satellites and probes and signal turnaround time? New Horizons Lunat and Mars recon orbiters? The laser is radio, but the passing gravity waves should add delay to signal?
i'm curious as to if diffusion and concentration of molecular clouds have significant impacts on the abundance or lack of stellar formation, and if pressurized regions impact on the cohesion of the formed compounds in differing regions in space, say could i find a more dense hydrogen compound in one region and a more diffuse hydrogen compound in another or is the distribution relatively uniform in one galaxy compared to another?
Please, if you can... and you would save my life here... post a link to all of the images used in this presentation and the original publication of the findings! This is very important for my research!
I love how this is actually a PROFESSIONAL who knows what he's talking about, but it has almost no views. Meanwhile, a bunch of amateur RU-vidrs are posting completely false information and getting tons of views. Says a lot about the average intellect of the average person.
Solar Planetary Transitory Spectroscopy AND Solar Gravitational Lensing Direct Observation - inferred existence of organic life using atmospheric chemical markers AND directly observed existence of planetary life processes.
Venus, we are told, has an atmosphere that is almost pure carbon dioxide and an extremely high surface temperature, 750 K, and this is allegedly due to the radiative greenhouse effect, RGHE. But the only apparent defense is, “Well, WHAT else could it BE?!” (besides/also molten core volcanism) Well, what follows is the else it could be: (Q = U * A * ΔT) aka a contiguous participating media. Venus is 70% of the Earth’s distance to the sun, its average solar constant/irradiance is about twice as intense as that of earth, 2,602 W/m^2 as opposed to 1,361 W/m^2. But the albedo of Venus is 0.77 compared to 0.31 for the Earth - or - Venus 601.5 W/m^2 net ASR (absorbed solar radiation) compared to Earth 943.9 W/m^2 net ASR. The Venusian atmosphere is 250 km thick as opposed to Earth’s at 100 km. Picture how hot you would get stacking 1.5 more blankets on your bed. RGHE’s got jack to do with it, it’s all Q = U * A * ΔT. The thermal conductivity of carbon dioxide is about half that of air, 0.0146 W/m-K as opposed to 0.0240 W/m-K so it takes twice the ΔT/m to move the same kJ from surface to ToA. Put the higher irradiance & albedo (lower Q = lower ΔT), thickness (greater thickness increases ΔT) and conductivity (lower conductivity raises ΔT) all together: 601.5/943.9 * 250/100 * 0.0240/0.0146 = 2.61. So, Q = U * A * ΔT suggests that the Venusian ΔT would be 2.61 times greater than that of Earth. If the surface of the Earth is 15C/288K and ToA is effectively 0K then Earth ΔT = 288C. Venus ΔT would be 2.61 * 288 C = 748.8 K surface temperature. All explained, no need for any S-B BB LWIR RGHE hocus pocus. Simplest explanation for the observation.
Dear Dr. Turyshev, I just saw this video and would like to ask you if have your team used this technique to have pictures of any exoplanets using a star other than our sun? Say the closest star to earth ( as you know ~4 light years away) as a gravitational lens to take develope pictures from some solar systems behind it. I am by no means any expert in these kind of things, but your argument seems logical to my little mind.
